1

A Systematic Review (SR) of Coaching Psychology: Focusing on the Attributes of

Effective Coaching Psychologists

Yi-Ling Lai and Dr. Almuth Mcdowall

School of Psychology University of Surrey

Yi-Ling Lai

School of Psychology

University of Surrey

y.lai@surrey.ac.uk

2

Abstract

Objective: Whilst a number of narrative reviews on coaching exist, there is yet no systematic

review which summarises the evidence based in a transparent way. To this extent, we

undertook a Systematic Review of Coaching Psychology evidence, following the initial

scoping and consultation phase, this focused on Coaching Psychologists’ attributes, such as

the required knowledge, attitudes and behaviours, which are associated with the effectiveness

of the coaching relationship and subsequent coaching results.

Design: Systematic Review is a methodology for locating, evaluating and synthesising

relevant existing studies through a standardised and transparent way. The review process

arises from a priori protocol which specifies the review topic, questions/hypotheses (which

may refined through expert consultation and any existing reviews in the field) and review

methods.

Methods: The initial search elicited 23,611 coaching papers by using 58 searching terms

through eight electronic databases (e.g. PsyINFO). A total of 140 included studies were

screened for further analysis by using seven inclusion criteria. Study results from the

included papers were integrated and analysed by Narrative Synthesis method.

Conclusion: This SR confirmed that coaching relationship is the key focus of coaching

research and practice. Besides, the professional psychological training / background was

emphasised as an essential requirement for a professional coach to manage coachee’s

emotions. In addition, it highlighted that coaches’ attributes have a significant influence on

the effectiveness of coaching process and results. An initial Coaching Psychologist

Competency Framework was outlined in this review which indicated the further research

trend for the continuous development of Coaching Psychology.

3

Keywords: Coaching Psychology, coaching relationship, Coaching Psychologist attributes,

Systematic Review

4

Introduction

Good literature reviews can inform us about current knowledge as well as gaps therein

(Gough et al. 2012). However, we need systematic, explicit and accountable methods to

produce reliable and replicable results for answering specific review hypotheses / questions,

such as Systematic Review (SR). SR has been used progressively in the Social Sciences

(Petticrew & Roberts, 2006); however SR is still rare in other fields such as in Industrial/

Organisational Psychology (Rojon, McDowall & Saunders, 2011). This paper presents a SR

of evidence on Coaching Psychology, where particular focus evolved on effective Coaching

Psychologists’ attributes. We now outline the principles of SR methodology, before

introducing the research questions, which we refined by means of a pilot study and expert

consultation, and then present our findings in detail.

What is a Systematic Review?

Systematic Review (SR) is a specific methodology that locates existing studies, selects

and evaluates contributions, analyses and synthesises data, and reports the evidence through a

rigorous and transparent way that shows reasonably clear conclusions to be reached about

what is and what is not known (Denyer & Tranfield, 2011). A SR usually starts with a prior

specific protocol which includes the review topic, questions/hypotheses, inclusion criteria and

review methods to test just a single hypothesis or a series of related hypotheses. Although

varied methods for synthesis have been applied to SRs (such as Meta-Analysis and Narrative

Synthesis), they depend on the nature and quality of the primary studies (Petticrew & Roberts,

2006). The overall review process thus comprises scoping and planning the review, searching

and screening the references, and evaluating and synthesising the included studies.

5

The Advantages of a Systematic Review (SR) Method

The advantages of SRs have been widely discussed, some key points are summarised in

the following paragraph to defend the rationale for conducting a SR in the context of

Coaching Psychology. Traditional narrative literature reviews can represent excellent

overviews of wider literature and concepts, not just reviews of outcomes (Petticrew &

Roberts, 2006). However, if any review is not conducted through a rigorous and transparent

process, critical studies might be neglected, as inclusion criteria may be based on the

reviewer’s personal research interests or the reviewer is unaware of relevant studies (Gough,

2012). Compared to traditional literature reviews, SR method can quickly assimilate a large

amount of information through the critical exploration, evaluation and synthesis. It separates

insignificant and redundant studies, which lack solid evidence to answer the research

question, from critical studies which do (Greenhalgh, 1998). In addition, the well-defined

methodology of SR mitigates research bias by explicitly identifying and rejecting studies

using clearly defined a prior criteria. Hence, a SR produces more reliable and accurate

conclusions by synthesising included studies than traditional methods do (Kitchenham &

Charters, 2007).

Why is a SR of Coaching Psychology Needed?

Coaching has been fast advancing in the organisational and leadership development field.

International Coach Federation (ICF) Global Coaching Study (2012) stated, there are

approximately 47,500 coaches worldwide (Western Europe, 37.5% and North America,

33.2%) and coaching has become a $2 billion per-year global market. In the UK, the

Chartered Institute of Personnel Development (CIPD) 2010 Annual Report indicated that

coaching is used in 82% of the U.K. organisations and it is rated as the most effective

6

activities of the Talent Management programmes (2012 CIPD Learning and Talent

Development Annual Survey Report).

Despite the growth in popularity, issues remain which need to be addressed. Firstly,

there is an on-going debate between psychologists and non-psychologists about whether

psychological principles and training area are core requirements for a professional coach. A

global survey (Newnham-Kanas et al. 2012) indicated a large percentage of coaches were

with business backgrounds rather than psychological or behavioural science backgrounds

(consultants 49.1%, formal educators, e.g. teachers and professors 20.8% and helping

professionals, e.g. psychologists and counsellors 15.6%). Grant (2008) stated that

contemporary professional coaching is a cross-disciplinary methodology, and not ‘owned’

by a particular professional group or association, which he considered both a strength and a

liability. On the other hand, such diversity increases the difficulty to develop a standardised

coaching definition, focus, result evaluation method and coaches’ selection and

development scheme (Sherman & Freas, 2004). Indeed, psychologists have increasingly and

more publicly become involved in the coaching industry in 1990’s, because the aim of

executive or life coaching is to facilitate sustained cognitive, emotional and behavioural

change (Douglas & MacCauley, 1999). In addition, a number of studies asserted that

coaches without fundamental psychology knowledge may not be able to recognise coaching

clients’ mental health issues and may cause harm to coaching clients (Berglas, 2002;

Naughton, 2002, Kauffman and Scoular, 2004 and Cavanagh, 2005). Therefore, to what

extent a background in psychology is an essential requirement for a professional coach is

still a point of debate. We decided to conduct a research with rigorous process to determine

if psychology plays a crucial role in coaching study and practice from existing relevant

studies.

7

Secondly, the research focus in coaching has shifted to the coaching relationship.

Traditionally, focus in the field of coaching has been on specific models, approaches and

techniques, directed towards ultimate goals for people’s overall learning and development (de

Haan & Sills, 2012). However, a meta-analysis (de Haan, 2008) indicated there is no

significant difference in effectiveness between different coaching techniques. Based on this

‘outcome equivalence’ (de Haan, 2008), the quality of the coaching relationship as well as the

coach and the coachee’s role in the process were identified as the most effective common

active ingredients for a positive coaching result (de Haan, 2008). A number of quantitative

studies have also indicated a positive correlation between the coaching relationship and

results, such as coachees’ self-efficacy (Baron & Morin, 2009; Jackson, Boyce & Neal, 2010;

de Haan & Duckworth, 2012). As the main purpose of coaching engagement is to facilitate

coachee’s change and improvement, the coachee’s reaction and response are the most

important and influential factor in the coaching process (de Haan, 2008). However, how the

self of coach is used to establish and maintain the coaching relationship is crucial as coaching

relationship is viewed as a professional helping relationship (O’Broin & Palmer, 2010).

Therefore, people and interpersonal interactions play a key role in the coaching process

(Palmer & McDowall, 2010 and O’Broin, 2010). A survey study (de Haan et al., 2011)

examined and identified the “helpful” coache’s qualities and behaviours that make the

coaching journey effective to coachees and how coachees “feel” their learning and change

through executive coaching. The study results indicated coaches’ behaviours have a

significant influence on coahees’ learning process, for example listening, understanding and

encouragement from the coach were viewed as the most helpful behaviours. Therefore, this

study implied coach has the accountability to initiate and establish a constructive relationship

in the coaching process. Given that the coach’s role has a certain degree influence on the

8

establishment of coaching relationship; we decided to investigate to what extent a

background in psychology facilitates a more effective coaching relationship.

In summary, the coach’s role in the coaching process and effective attributes of a sound

coaching relationship have been widely discussed (Boyatzis et al. 2006; Jones & Spooner,

2006; Orenstein, 2006; de Haan, 2008 and Palmer & McDowall, 2010). However, the

existing evidence is not adequate to determine whether and what are specific combinations of

personality/attributes produce greater effects of coaching relationship (de Haan, 2008 and

Passmore & Fillery-Travis, 2011). Further, we also need more rigorous studies to investigate

on if background in psychology for a professional coach benefits to establishing an effective

coaching relationship. Prior to any primary research, it would be helpful however to review

the evidence in Coaching Psychology systematically to determine how new research can fit to

existing knowledge gap through a transparent and systematic process.

Although some reviews (Grant 2001, Whybrow 2008; Bachkirova 2008; and Passmore

& Fillery-Travis, 2011) have highlighted a critical role for psychology in coaching study

and practice; these narrative literature reviews did not spell out explicit reviews topics,

hypotheses, study selection criteria or review methods on which conclusions were based.

Hence, these reviews may not be sufficiently robust. Therefore, a SR to synthesise relevant

studies in the field based on a well-defined protocol is needed to determine to what extent

psychology plays a crucial role in coaching study and practice, based on specific review

questions with focus on coach’s attributes and the coaching relationship.

Our overview process comprised three main phases, which we summarise here.

Insert Table 1. A Systematic Review Process:

9

Stage One: Scoping the studies of the field and planning the review

The first step ascertained if a SR was needed and developed a comprehensive review

protocol including review topic, questions/hypotheses and methods.

Firstly, a pilot literature search was undertaken through PsyINFO, Business Complete,

Index to Theses, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library in 2010 to verify there was no SR on

coaching before commencement of this study. The searching terms used included “coaching”,

“review” and “systematic”. Secondly, ten coaching experts (both academics or practitioners)

from international locations were identified from Coaching focused journals and handbooks

and through consultation with UK coaching experts and invited to participate as a review

panel. The review panel included nine psychologists and one management researcher. They

had on average ten years experiences in coaching practice and all undertook research in some

capacity.

Insert Table 2. The Demographics of Review Panels

One-on-one interviews were conducted with each review panel member to elicit their

perspectives on the key elements of Coaching Psychology, the aspects of existing coaching

results evaluation methods and the comments on the draft review protocol. The interview

schedule comprised three broad topics which were a) definitions of coaching and Coaching

Psychology respectively, b) perspectives on evaluation criteria and processes to determine

coaching results and effectiveness, and c) comments on the proposed review topic and

questions, and database to base eventual searches on.

Qualitative integration of the interview responses elicited that “coaching is a reflective

process between coaches and coachees which helps or facilitates coachees to experience

positive behavioural changes through continuous dialogue and negotiations with coaches to

10

meet coachees’ personal or work goals.” On the other hand, “Coaching Psychology aims to

help or facilitate the non-clinical populations for sustained behavioural changes through

psychological evidence-based interventions and process. These interventions will help the

coach to get deeper and richer pictures of coachees’ behaviours, motivations, values and

beliefs during the coaching process and facilitate coachees to achieve their goals. In addition,

coach, coachee and organisational stakeholders all play the critical roles in the coaching

process as the ultimate goals are to facilitate coachee’s development in the workplace through

interactive communications with coach. Moreover, the “coaching process and relationship”

was highlighted across the interviews as being important, and most panel members indicated

coaches have the responsibility to create a comfortable environment for enhancing an

effective coaching relationship.

In summary, the SR panels believed applying psychological interventions in the coaching

process does assist the coach to have a deeper understanding of coachee’s behaviours and

motivations for change. However, coaching contents and evaluations are very diverse and

there is not enough existing empirical research to examine any one specific coaching

framework, especially given that many coaches and studies adopted an integrative approach,

rendering it difficult to elicit active ingredients in any one coaching orientation. Thus, the SR

panels highlighted the shift to a relational coaching study and practice as coaching process is

based on people’s communications and interactions. The coach has the accountability to

initiate a comfortable environment for the effective coaching relationship. Following the pilot

search and consultation with the SR panels, the focus of this SR topic was agreed to

investigate key successful factors for an effective coaching relationship, and to identify the

essential attributes needed by a Coaching Psychologist to enhance the coaching relationship.

11

The finalised review questions are:

(1) How many and what kind of studies have evaluated Coaching Psychologist’s

attributes in a robust and systematic way?

(2) What are the effective Coaching Psychologist’s attributes (required knowledge,

attitudes and skills) in the coaching process to enhance the coaching relationship?

Step Two: Undertaking the literature search and screening the references:

The second step elicited relevant papers and screened the included studies for further

review. The researcher used 58 search terms (e.g. cogniti* and coaching) identified from key

Coaching Psychology books (e.g. Handbook of Coaching Psychology) and the review panels.

These terms were searched through eight electronic databases (e.g. PsyINFO) and 23,611

studied were retrieved. Consistent with SR methodology, seven prior inclusive criteria (e.g.

empirical research which used psychological interventions in the coaching process) were

adopted to filter studies by reading abstracts and skimming the paper contents. A total of 140

studies remained for further synthesis.

Step Three: Evaluating and synthesising the included studies:

This stage assessed study quality by identifying any significant bias and integrated the

evidences among the included studies to seek answers of the review questions. In order to

ensure each study would be analysed and synthesised consistently and objectively, key

information (e.g. research methods, details of interventions and outcome of interests) from

each study was extracted and summarised on an Excel file. (See table 3.)

Inset Table 3. The Example of Information Extracting Form

12

Firstly, the “research methods”, “coaching interventions” and “results evaluation

schemes” of each included study were assessed to assure these studies are adequate for

answering the research questions. Each paper was rated by adding up the scores gained from

the three indicators mentioned above. (See Table 4.) The results from higher scored /rated

studies were placed in higher priority when synthesising the included papers.

Insert Table 4. The Example of Study Appraisal / Evaluation Method

Subsequently, a Narrative Synthesis method (Petticrew & Roberts, 2006) was adopted

given that many included studies were conducted using qualitative research methods. The

study results of each paper were outlined on the Excel table. Cross-study synthesis was

undertaken through comparing the study results and selecting the most rated / examined ones.

The study appraisal rate was considered while cross synthesising the study results. For

example, the study results from a quantitative study (e.g. an experiment) were placed in the

higher priority than the ones in a case report.

13

Findings:

Paper distributions and classifications

The majority of the studies included in the final review (64 of 180 papers) based on the

inclusion criteria had been published in psychology focused journals (e.g. International

Coaching Psychology Review) and 40 were from business and management journals. These

studies were sorted into four categories according to their respective research purposes by

reading through their abstracts. The table below summarises the overview of what are the

main coaching study focus up to date and presents one example:

Insert Table 5. Distributions and Classifications of the Included Studies

Key factors for a positive coaching relationship

Five key factors that enhance the coaching relationship were identified by synthesising

15 relevant included studies. These studies examined the relations between the coaching

process and results and analysed factors influencing an effective coaching relationship. The

researcher listed all included study results on an excel spreadsheet and outlined the most

examined and highlighted effective factors for enhancing the coaching process. Subsequently,

these effective factors were ranked by considering both the frequency they were

examined/referred and the method used in the study. For example, the effective factors

examined / rated from a quantitative study were placed in a higher order than the ones from a

case study. The table below summarises the research methods and most examined effective

factors:

14

Insert Table 6. The Overview of Five Key Factors for a Positive Coaching Relationship

Building trust: Establishing and maintaining a trusting relationship was identified as one

of the critical elements to enhance the coaching process. Three qualitative studies (one case

study and two semi-structured interviews studies) indicated mutual trust between the coach

and the coachee plays a key role to facilitate the coaching process. A case study (Freedom &

Perry, 2010) that collected perspectives from one coach-coachee pair disclosed that the

coachee would not feel alone and with little support until the coach is trustworthy and reliable.

Two qualitative studies (Gyllensten & Palmer, 2007 and O’Broin & Palmer, 2010) that

investigated effective factors for a positive coaching relationship by interviewing coaches and

coachees also emphasised the importance of trust in the coaching process. Trust was most

frequently discussed in the interviews (O’Broin & Palmer, 2010), and nearly 92% of

participants (11 of 12 interviewees) considered “trust” is one of the critical element to engage

coachees. In addition, trust was rated as the second important variable influencing the

employee coaching relationship in one survey study (Gregory & Levy, 2011). Therefore,

establishing trust with coachees in the initial coaching process is a significant step for a

constructive coaching relationship.

Understanding and managing coachees’ emotional difficulties: Coping with coachees’

emotional reaction was recognised as a key factor in the coaching process as most coachees

experienced anxiety, sadness and frustration while seeking help from coaches (de Haan et al.,

2008). Three included studies from this SR focused on the examination of the correlation

between coachees’ emotions and coaching relationship. A case study conducted by Freedman

& Perry (2010) identified “helping coachees to contain and take the edge off the intensity of

their emotions” will enable an effective coaching relationship. Another case report (Day,

15

2010) which investigated how unconscious organisation dynamics affect the effectiveness of

coaching relationship highlighted whether a coach possesses the emotional maturity and

confidence to work with difficult emotional material is a critical element for enhancing a

positive coaching relationship. Unconscious dynamics in organisations can be understood as

arising in a wider psychosocial context (Lewin, 1952), which is made up of the interplay of

psychological, social, economic, power and political processes (Holti, 1997). In this study,

the subsequent exploration of the dynamics of the coaching relationship helped the coachee

to understand at a deeper level his struggle in the organisation and to take up a different

position in the organisation dynamics. In addition, de Haan et al. (2008) undertook a

qualitative research (IPA) into 28 experienced coaches’ critical moments in the coaching

process. This study demonstrated that coaches’ critical moments in the coaching process are

highly influenced by coachees’ emotions. These critical moments and emotional reactions

can be opportunities for insight and change in the coaching relationship. From this study,

coaches reported using supervision to help them to make sense of critical moments and

respond appropriately. In summary, coaches and coachees both undergo some critical

moments (emotional difficulties) in the coaching process because coachees’ anxiety and

frustration have a strong influence on coaches’ emotions. Thus, managing these emotions and

transferring them into positive insights for coachees to change is a crucial factor for an

effective coaching relationship.

Two way communication: Effective communication process was also considered as an

essential ingredient for a harmonious coaching relationship from this SR. It includes active

listening and questioning, mutual feedback, space for story sharing and appropriate verbal

and body language. Listening and appropriate feedback were rated and examined as a main

dimension for evaluating a positive employee coaching relationship in two survey studies

16

(Gregory & Levy, 2010 and 2011). A case study (Robinson, 2010) also investigated how to

apply literary techniques (using story-telling, analogy, and metaphors) to analyse and

interpret coaching conversations to enable sense-making and enhancement of insightful

questioning, interpretation and reflective practice. This study indicated there is a positive

relation between the application of literary techniques and coaching relationship. From this

SR, maintaining effective communication process through highly developed listening,

questioning, feedback and language-using skills will enhance the understanding between the

coach and the coachee and their relationship.

Facilitation and help: Facilitating and helping coachees’ learning and development to

meet needs was highlighted as a key ingredient to enhance the coaching relationship from this

SR. According to Baron and Morin’s within-subject experimental study (2009) with 73

participants who attended a leadership development programme, coach’s facilitating learning

and results skills are positively associated with working alliance. Facilitating development

was also examined and confirmed as a key dimension for evaluating the effectiveness of

coaching relationship in a quantitative study by Gregory and Levy (2010). In addition, half of

the participants (6 of 12 interviewees) in a qualitative study (O’Broin and Palmer, 2010)

emphasised two-way relationship (e.g. collaboration and facilitation) in the coaching process

could help the coach to have a better understanding of coachee’s needs and to develop a

shared goal. This process will also facilitate coach to engage the coachee and establish a

better relationship.

Clear contract and transparent process: Having a clear contract and transparent

coaching process was viewed as one key factor for establishing a positive relationship at the

initial stage of the coaching engagement. The case study undertaken by Freedman and Perry

17

(2010) indicated it was really helpful for establishing a trusting relationship after the coach

explained the process, both parties’ accountabilities, evaluation methods and confidential

issues. In addition, an IPA study (Gyllensten & Palmer, 2007) which investigated nine

participants’ experience of coaching demonstrated “transparency” was considered very

positively associated with a valuable coaching relationship. For instance, the coachees felt

included and engaged when the coach explained the process and theories supporting the

coaching interventions before any sessions commenced.

In summary, building trust, understanding and managing coachees’ emotional

difficulties, having two way communication process, facilitating coachees’ learning and

development and having a clear contract and transparent process were identified as the top

five critical factors for enhancing the coaching process. These factors were also considered

and integrated into the next stage data synthesis, which aimed to analyse key attributes for a

professional coach to enhance the coaching relationship.

An initial Coaching Psychologist Competency Framework

A total of 32 included studies which investigated key coaches’ attributes to enhance a

constructive coaching relationship were synthesised in this review. As discussed above, how

the self of coach is used to interact with coachee for an effective coaching relationship and

positive results is crucial (O’Broin & Palmer, 2010 and de Haan, 2008). A study (de Haan et

al., 2011) identified effective executive coaches’ behaviours that benefit to coaching

relationship from coachees’ views through questionnaires. This study indicated certain

coaches’ knowledge/experience; behaviours and qualities are “helpful” for enhancing an

effective and constructive coaching process. The study results provided an overview of what

coachees consider and expect of a “helpful” coach; also implied more research to examine

18

specific aspects of effective coaches’ attributes is required. Prior to any primary research, it is

essential to examine the existing evidence through a systematic process. The 32 included

papers comprise 12 quantitative, 11 qualitative and nine mixed methods studies. (See Table. 7)

Insert Table 7. The Overview of Coaches’ Effective Attributes Studies

According to Bartram (2008), a comprehensive person specification for a job role

includes knowledge, skills, ability and other characteristics (such as personality and attitudes

etc.) Therefore, study results from these included papers were sorted into three competence

groups i) required knowledge and experiences, ii) personality/attitudes and iii) skills and

behaviours. All included study results were listed on an excel spreadsheet. Most examined

and highlighted effective attributes for a coach were outlined. Subsequently, these effective

attributes were ranked by considering both the frequency they were examined / referred and

the methods used in the study. Top ranked attributes were integrated and outlined as an Initial

Coaching Psychologist Competency Framework (see Table. 8). The structure of the

competency framework was based on the

Insert Table 8. An Initial Coaching Psychologist Competency Framework

Required knowledge: This section outlines relevant knowledge / educational backgrounds

required for a professional coach. Three key areas were identified after synthesising eight

relevant included papers: i) psychological relevant knowledge / educational backgrounds, ii)

psychological coaching framework / process and iii) leadership and organisational

management knowledge. A quantitative study (Wasylyshyn, 2003) with 87 participants rated

“graduate level training in psychology” as the most important criterion (82%) when they

19

select a coach. Six included studies which focused on the examination of the relations

between coachees’ emotions and coaching process also disclosed coping with coachees’

reactions effectively is a key requirement for a professional coach. These two studies

indicated having an appropriate psychological training / educational background will assist

the coach to identify and manage emotional reactions and difficulties from coachees. This

will also facilitate the coaching process. In addition, a qualitative study by Maritz et al.

(2009) emphasised a professional coach should be acquainted with certain level concepts of

organisational management, leadership / people development and business acumen because

most of the coachees’ issues were associated with their workplaces and colleagues. In

summary, appropriate training in psychology and being acquainted with most frequently used

psychological coaching interventions and certain degree of organisational / leadership

management concepts will provide a professional coach to have a fundamental knowledge

base to articulate an effective coaching process.

Personalities/Attitudes: This section summarises the effective attitudes / personalities a

professional coach should possess to facilitate their relationships with coachees. Five most

highlighted attitudes for a coach were outlined after integrating results from four included

studies (Wasylyshyn, 2003, Stevens, 2005, Maritz et al., 2009 and Passmore, 2010) which

investigated both coaches’ and coachees’ perspectives by interviews and questionnaires.

They are i) openness/honesty/authenticity, ii) integrity / confidentiality, iii) non-judgemental /

objective, iv) enthusiasm / passion, and v) commitment / motivation to help.

Skills: Three key skills were identified after cross-analysing results from the 32 included

papers that studied the critical competences for a professional coach. First, communication

skills were rated and emphasised most from coaches’, coachees’ and coaching purchasers’

perspectives and expectations (Longenecker & Neubert, 2005; Maritz et al., 2009; Passmore,

20

2010; Griffiths & Campbell, 2008 and Dagley, 2011). They include listening and reflecting

back actively, powerful questioning, providing and seeking feedback and using appropriate

verbal and body language. Second, establishing a constructive relationship with coachees was

highlighted from several included studies (Longenecker & Neubert, 2005 and Maritz et al.,

2009). From the study results, demonstrating empathy and supporting and engaging coachees

were emphasised as the effective behaviours for a professional coach to build a positive

coaching relationship. Third, facilitating coachees’ learning and development was also

remarked by most participants in several included studies (Longenecker & Neubert, 2005;

Griffiths& Campbell, 2008 and Maritz et al., 2009). The key behaviours include helping to

set the appropriate goals and actions and managing progress and accountability.

In conclusion, the attributes for a professional coach identified from this SR could be a

basis for the further Coaching Psychology study to develop and examine a Coaching

Psychologist Competency Framework.

Discussion:

This is the first SR in the coaching domain which examined the role of Coaching

Psychology in contemporary coaching study and practice through a rigid and transparent

process. The review results ascertained Coaching Psychologist’s attributes (required

knowledge, attitudes/personality and skills) have a significant influence on the effectiveness

of coaching relationship and results. Five key points were summarised from the review

findings which are also in response to the review questions / hypotheses in the protocol

consulted with the review panels.

First, this SR confirmed that coaching processes and the relationship are the key foci of

coaching research and practice. One-third of the included studies (47 of 140 papers)

21

highlighted the link between the coaching relationship and coaching results and investigated

the effective coaches’ attributes for facilitating a constructive coaching relationship. These

studies were mainly conducted in qualitative research methods (12 semi-structured

interviews, seven case studies and one longitudinal observation report). The rest of the papers

comprise six experiments, 15 surveys and eight mix-methods studies.

Second, in the papers reviewed here, the professional psychological training /

professional background was emphasised as an essential requirement for a professional

coach. Coachees’ emotional reactions / moments were recognised as the key turning points

and opportunities to facilitate coachees’ motivations for change. A coach who is able to apply

psychological interventions appropriately to identify and manage coachees’ emotional

difficulties facilitates a better relationship in the coaching process (de Haan et al., 2008; Day,

2010; Freedman & Perry, 2010 and Gregory & Levry, 2011). In addition, a quantitative study

(Wasylyshyn, 2003) with 87 participants rated “graduate level training in psychology” as the

most important criterion (82%) for a professional coach. As discussed above, coaching is still

not a standardised and accredited profession due to the diversity of coaches’ prior

professional backgrounds. Although a few traditional literature reviews (Grant 2001,

Whybrow 2008; Bachkirova 2008; and Passmore & Fillery-Travis, 2011) highlighted the

importance of applying psychological interventions in the coaching field, this SR is the first

review based on the explicit search terms and well-defined review process to confirm having

a background in psychology will assist the coach to have a deeper understanding of coachees’

issues and to facilitate their motivations to change. More precisely, psychological training is

an essential requirement for a professional coach.

Third, this SR highlighted that coaches’ attributes have a significant influence on the

effectiveness of coaching process and results. Five effective factors (building trust,

22

understanding and managing coachees’ emotional difficulties, having two way

communication process, facilitating coachees’ learning and development and having a clear

contract and transparent process) for a constructive coaching relationship outlined from this

SR are all associated with coaches’ attitudes and competences. The initial Coaching

Psychologist Competency Framework summarised from this SR also provide an overview of

what attributes a professional coach should acquire to facilitate an effective coaching process.

These findings indicated that coaches’ attitudes and behaviours demonstrated in the coaching

process have a significant impact on the coachees’ emotions and reactions. Therefore,

coaches have the accountability to initiate and maintain an effective relationship in the

coaching process based on obsessing attitudes and skills outlined from the included studies.

Nevertheless, this SR concluded that more rigorous empirical studies are required as

most of the existing coaching studies (approximately 70%) were undertaken by qualitative

methods such as case studies and interviews. In addition, 65% of the included studies

evaluated the coaching results solely based on coachees’ personal satisfactions and attitude

changes rather than tracking their behavioural or performance improvement. Therefore, the

future research should emphasise on the improvement of research methods and coaching

result evaluation approaches to ensure producing more rigorous and replicable study results.

Finally, this SR identified the future research trends for the development of Coaching

Psychology. The researcher summarised key attributes for a professional coach from the

included studies, which will enhance the coaching relationship (including required

knowledge, attributes/personalities and skills). These attributes and features were integrated

into an initial Coaching Psychologist Competency Framework (see Table 8.) which also

indicated further research trends in Coaching Psychology field. As discussed above,

coaches’ diverse backgrounds increase the difficulty to develop a standardised coaching

definition, focus, result evaluation method and coaches’ selection and development scheme

23

(Sherman & Freas, 2004). This draft sketch outlined from the exiting evidence could be a

foundation for the future coaching studies which intend to develop and validate a

competency framework for professional coaches.

In conclusion, there is still a big debate about whether having a background in

psychology is an essential requirement for a professional coach. Although a few narrative

literature reviews have ascertained the critical role psychology plays in the coaching field and

certain psychological interventions (e.g. CBC and Solution-focused method) were verified

their effectiveness to enhance the coaching result through quantitative studies. These

evidences are still not solid enough to confirm the psychological standings in coaching field.

The previous reviews on Coaching Psychology (Grant 2001, Whybrow 2008; Bachkirova

2008; and Passmore & Fillery-Travis, 2011) which did not define clear review criteria and

methods may not generate replicable results. Prior undertaking more rigorous primary studies

to facilitate the development of Coaching Psychology, an overview of what we have from

existing evidences and what focus should be emphasised on in the future research to fill in the

knowledge gaps is an essential step. This SR is the first review which synthesised all relevant

coaching studies through a standard and rigid process to investigate the subsequent

development trends for Coaching Psychology. The review results assured coaching

relationship is the key factor for enhancing the effectiveness of coaching results and the

coach has the accountability to initiate and manage an effective coaching process. Because

five crucial ingredients (e.g. building trust and facilitating the development and learning) for

a constructive coaching relationship outlined from the included studies are all associated with

coaches’ attitudes and behaviours. Furthermore, a total of 32 included papers intended to

identify the effective attributes for a coach to facilitate the coaching relationship. Having a

psychological background to manage coachees’ emotions and have a deeper understanding of

their issues was emphasised as the essential criterion for a professional coach. However, most

24

(70%) of the included studies were still undertaken through qualitative research methods (e.g.

case reports and interviews). Therefore this SR concluded that the future Coaching

Psychology research should continue investigating the effective attributes for a professional

coach and what sorts of psychological interventions / concepts should be included in a

professional coaching training programme through the rigorous research methods and process.

25

Reference

Bachkirova, T. (2008). Role of coaching psychology in defining boundaries between

counselling and coaching. In Palmer S. and Whybrow A. (Eds.), Handbook of Coaching

Psychology: a Guide for Practitioners. 2nd Edition, 351-366.

Baron, L. & Morin, L. (2009). The coach–coaching client Relationship in executive

coaching: A field study. Human Resource Development Quarterly. Vol.20 Issue 1. 85-

105.

Berglas, S. (2002). The very real dangers of executive coaching. Harvard Business Review.

80, 87-92.

Boyatzis, R. A., Smith, M. L. & Blaize, N. (2006). Developing sustainable leaders through

coaching and compassion. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5, 8-24.

Boyce, L. A., Jackson, R.J. & Neal, L. J. (2010). Building successful leadership coaching

relationships: Examining impact of matching criteria in a leadership coaching program.

Emerald Article, Vol. 29 Issue: 10, 914 – 931.

Bown, M. & Sutton, A. (2010). Quality control in Systematic Reviews and meta-analyses.

European Society for Vascular Surgery. (40), 669-677.

Cavanagh, M. (2005). Mental-health issues and challenging clients in executive coaching. In

M. Cavanagh, A.M. Grant and T. Kemp (Eds) Evidence Based Coaching, Volume 1,

Theory, Research and Practice from the Behavioural Science (pp.21-36). Browen Hills,

Qld: Australian Academic Press.

26

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. (2010). Annual Survey Report 2010

Learning and Development. London: CIPD.

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development .(2012). Learning and Talent Development

Annual Survey Report. Retrieved October 10, 2012, from

http://www.digitalopinion.co.uk/files/documents/CIPD_2012_LTD_Report.pdf

Dagley, G. R. (2011). Exceptional executive coaches: practices and attributes. International

Coaching Psychology Review, 5(1), 63:80

Day, A. (2010). Coaching at relational depth: a case study. Journal of Management

Development, 29(10), 864-876.

Denyer, D. & Tranfield, D. (2011). Producing a systematic review. In Buchanan D. and

Bryman A. (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Organisational Research Methods 2nd Edition

(p.671-689). London , U.K. Sage.

de Haan, E. (2008). Relational Coaching: Journeys Towards Mastering One-to-one Learning.

Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

de Haan, E., Day, A., Sills, C., Bertie C. & Blass E. (2008). Coaches' experience of critical

moments in the coaching. International Coaching Psychology Review 3(3): 207-218

de Haan, E. & Duckworth, A. (2012). The coaching relationship and other 'common factors'

in executive coaching outcome, in E. de Haan & C. Sills (Eds) Coaching Relationships:

Relational Coaching Field Book, Faringdon: Libri.

de Haan, E. & Sillis, C. (2012). Coaching Relationship: Relational Coaching Field Book.

Faringdon: Libri.

27

de Haan, E., Culpin, V. & Curd, J. (2011). Executive coaching in practice: what determines

helpfulness for clients of coaching. Personnel Review 40(1): 24-44

Douglas, C. A., & McCauley, C. D. (1999). Formal developmental relationships: A survey of

organizational practices. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 10, 203 – 220.

Freedman, A. M. & Perry, J. A. (2010). Executive consulting under pressure: A case study.

Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(3) 189-202.

Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2012). An Introduction to Systematic Reviews. SAGE

Publications.

Grant, A. M. (2001). Toward a psychology of coaching: The impact of coaching on

metacognition, mental health and goal attainment. Sydney: Coaching Psychology Unit,

University of Sydney.

Grant, A. M. (2008) .Past, present and future: the evolution of professional coaching and

coaching psychology. In Palmer S. and Whybrow A. (Eds.), Handbook of Coaching

Psychology: a guild for practitioners. 2nd Edition, 23-39.

Greenhalgh, T. (1998). How to read a paper: the basics of evidence based medicine. BMJ

Publishing Group.

Gregory, J. B. & Levy, P. E. (2010). Employee coaching relationships: Enhancing construct

clarity and measurement. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research

and Practice 3(2), 109-123.

Gregory, J. B. & Levy, P. E. (2011). It's not me, it's you: A multilevel examination of

variables that impact employee coaching relationships. Consulting Psychology

Journal: Practice and Research 63(2), 67-88.

28

Griffiths, K. & Campbell, M. (2008). Regulating the regulators: Paving the way for

international, evidence-based coaching standards. International Journal of Evidence

Based Coaching & Mentoring, 6(1), 19-31.

Gyllensten, K. & S. Palmer (2007). The coaching relationship: An interpretative

phenomenological analysis. International Coaching Psychology Review 2(2), 168-177.

Holti, R. (1997). “Consulting to organisational implications of technical change”, in

Neumann, J.E., Kellner, K. and Dawson-Shepherd, A. (Eds), Developing

Organisational Consultancy, Brunner-Routledge, London.

International Coach Federation (2012). Global Coaching Study Executive Summary.

Retrieved October 20, 2012, from

http://www.coachfederation.org/includes/media/docs/2012ICFGlobalCoachingStudy-

ExecutiveSummary.pdf

Jones, G & Sponner, K. (2006). Coaching high achievers. Consulting Psychology Journal:

Practice and Research, 58, 40-50.

Maritz, J.E., Poggenpoel, M., & Myburgh, C.P.H. (2009). Core competencies necessary for a

managerial psycho-educational training programme for business team coaches. South

Africa Journal of Human Resource Managemen, 7(1), 74-81.

Naughton, J. (2002). The coaching boom: Is it the long-awaited alternative to the medical

model? Psychotherapy Networker, 42, July/August, 1–10

Newnham-Kanas C., Morrow D., & Irwin J.D. (2012). Certified Professional Co-Active

Coaches: Why They Enjoy Coaching. International Journal of Evidence Based

Coaching and Mentoring, 10 (1), 48-56.

29

Kitchenham, B.A. & Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature

Reviews in Software Engineering, Version 2.3, Keele University, EBSE Technical

Report, EBSE-2007-01.

Kauffman, C. & Scoular, A. (2004). Towards a positive psychology of executive coaching. In

P.A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive Psychology in Practice (pp.287–302).

Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Lewin, K. (1952). “Defining the field at any given time”, in Cartwright, D. (Ed.), Field

Theory in Social Science, Tavistock Pubications, London.

Longenecker, C. O. & Neubert M. J. (2005). The practices of effective managerial coaches.

Business Horizons, 48(6), 493-500.

O’Broin, A. (2010). Enhancing the coaching alliance and relationship. In S. Palmer & M.

Neenan (Eds). Cognitive Behavioural Coaching in Practice: An Evidence Based

Approach. Hove: Routledge.

Orenstein, R. L. (2006). Measuring executive coaching efficacy? The answer was right here

all the time. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 58, 106-116.

Palmer, S. & McDowall A. (2010). The coaching relationship: putting people first: an

introduction. In S. Palmer & A. McDowall (Eds.), The Coaching Relationship:

Putting People First (pp. 1-8). London: Routledge.

Palmer, S. & O’Brion, A. (2010). Exploring key aspects in the formation of coaching

relationships: Initial indicators from the perspective of the coachee and the coach.

30

Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 3(2): 124-143.

Petticrew, M. & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic Review in Social Sciences: A Practical Guide.

Oxford: Blackwell.

Passmore, J. (2010). A grounded theory study of the coachee experience: The implications

for training and practice in coaching psychology. International Coaching Psychology

Review, 5(1), 48-62.

Passmore, J. & Fillery-Travis, A. (2011). A critical review of executive coaching research: a

decade of progress and what's to come. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory,

Research and Practice, 4(2), 70-88.

Robinson, E. (2010). The use of literary techniques in coaching. Journal of Management

Development, 29(10). 902-913.

Rojon, C., McDowall, A., & Saunders, M. N. K. (2011). On the experience of conducting a

systematic review in Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology: Yes, it is

worthwhile. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10(3), 133-138.

Stevens, Jr, J. H. (2005). Executive coaching from the executive's perspective. Consulting

Psychology Journal: Practice & Research, 35(6), 751-760.

Sherman, S. & Freas, A. (2004). The wild west of executive coaching. Harvard Business

Review. 82(11), 82-90.

Wasylyshyn, K. M. (2003). Executive Coaching: An Outcome Study. Consulting Psychology

Journal: Practice & Research, 55(2), 94-106.

Whybrow, A. (2008). Coaching Psychology: Coming of age? International Coaching

Psychology Review, 3(3), 219-226.